|
|
|
|
|
by crazygringo
771 days ago
|
|
How do you know it was "AI-fuelled"? And what makes it a "frenzy"? People have been committing terrible code to projects for decades now, long before AI. The solution is a code review process that works, and accountability if experienced employees are approving commits without properly reviewing them. AI shouldn't have anything to do with it. Bad code shouldn't be passing review period, no matter if it was AI-assisted or not. And if your org doesn't do code review, then that's the actual problem. |
|
You’re putting the entire responsibility on senior employees. So we need much more of them. In fact, we don’t need juniors, because we can generate all possible code combinations. After all, it’s the responsibility of the seniors to select which one is correct.
It’s like how hiring was made crap by the “One-click apply” on LinkedIn and all other platforms. Sure it’s easy for thousands of people to apply. Fact is, we offer quite a good job with high salary, and were looking for 5 people. We’ve spent a full year selecting them, because we’ve receive hundreds of irrelevant applications, probably some AI-generated.
It’s no use to flood a filter with crap, hoping that the filter will do better work because it has a lot of input.